Claims

One included study reported a 13.2% per-student cost reduction with CBL versus TL, but cost-efficiency was not consistently reported

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? One included study reported a 13.2% per-student cost reduction with CBL versus TL, but cost-efficiency was not consistently reported across studies. → Morsund Lars Andreas Lars 2026

Evidence

Morsund Lars Andreas Lars 2026

Morsund Lars Andreas Lars, Singh Shraddha, Patel Agastya, Lancellotti Francesco, Satyadas Thomas. (2026). Computer-based surgical skill training: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-08830-7

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review reports "a cost reduction of 13.2% per student" from one included study and explicitly cautions that cost-efficiency was not consistently reported.

"It is also notable that one included study reported a cost reduction of 13.2% per student when using CBL as compared to TL [27]. While this observation is promising, cost-efficiency was not consistently reported across studies, and therefore this benefit should be interpreted cautiously."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.